If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

fair point. I mean there's a lot to like about about Ryan, but the tea party affiliation is gonna hurt him in the national spotlight. Then again, same thing can be said for Rubio (who while not a member is supported by them). I know the rumors are Romney wanted Rubio to be his VP and Rubio declined.

Can't see Jeb succeeding. Don't know much about him as governor, but he's not gonna escape his brother's shadow.

Oh, i'll doubt he will succeed, but i wouldnt be surprised to see him run.

And my personal opinion on him as governor is very low. That said, i know many die hard conservatives who also considered him hot garbage as governor.

According to McGraw-Hill’s (MHP) S&P Capital IQ, the S&P 500 has rallied an average of 12.1% per year since 1901 when Democrats occupy the White House, compared with just 5.1% for the GOP.

Likewise, gross domestic product has increased 4.2% each year since 1949 when Democrats run the executive branch, versus 2.6% under Republicans.

Even corporate profits show a disparity: S&P 500 GAAP earnings per share climbed a median of 10.5% per year since 1936 during Democratic administrations, besting an 8.9% median advance under Republicans, S&P said.

Due to their “tax-and-spend” reputation, investors expect Democratic administrations to underperform Republican ones and be “poison to any portfolio,” Sam Stovall, chief equity strategist at S&P Capital IQ, wrote in a note. “History shows the opposite to be true, however.”

The best stretch of market performance since 1900 occurred in 1993-2000 under Bill Clinton, who saw the S&P 500 rally an average of 19.9% per year during his presidency, S&P said.

As strange as it may sound, diehard Republicans believe that President Barack Obama’s tenure has been disastrous to U.S. business. Stock market returns so far during his tenure tell another story. A recent Reuters article detailed that the S&P 500 is up some 74% since Obama took office in late January 2009. But it is somewhat surprising to learn that this is the strongest first-term performance since Dwight Eisenhower served his first term back in the 1950s.

Truman was ranked the highest and happens to be a Democrat. Truman’s tenure saw a budget surplus, reduction in national debt and a record-low unemployment rate of 4%. The second spot also went to a Democrat: John F. Kennedy, who was followed by Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson.

Now Carter’s rank as second last as he served during the difficult economic environment in the 1970s. But since he was the sitting president, I'm not excusing him.

And I am completely aware The Federal Reserve and other politicians in Congress certainly pulled together to help save the economy from financial ruin at the height of the credit crisis.

As the historical record shows, from economic growth and job creation to stock market performance and just about every other indicator of the health of American capitalism, the modern U.S. economy has almost always done better under Democratic presidents. Despite GOP mythology to the contrary, America generally gained more jobs and grew faster when taxes were higher (even much higher) and income inequality lower.

According to McGraw-Hill’s (MHP) S&P Capital IQ, the S&P 500 has rallied an average of 12.1% per year since 1901 when Democrats occupy the White House, compared with just 5.1% for the GOP.

Likewise, gross domestic product has increased 4.2% each year since 1949 when Democrats run the executive branch, versus 2.6% under Republicans.

Even corporate profits show a disparity: S&P 500 GAAP earnings per share climbed a median of 10.5% per year since 1936 during Democratic administrations, besting an 8.9% median advance under Republicans, S&P said.

Due to their “tax-and-spend” reputation, investors expect Democratic administrations to underperform Republican ones and be “poison to any portfolio,” Sam Stovall, chief equity strategist at S&P Capital IQ, wrote in a note. “History shows the opposite to be true, however.”

The best stretch of market performance since 1900 occurred in 1993-2000 under Bill Clinton, who saw the S&P 500 rally an average of 19.9% per year during his presidency, S&P said.

As strange as it may sound, diehard Republicans believe that President Barack Obama’s tenure has been disastrous to U.S. business. Stock market returns so far during his tenure tell another story. A recent Reuters article detailed that the S&P 500 is up some 74% since Obama took office in late January 2009. But it is somewhat surprising to learn that this is the strongest first-term performance since Dwight Eisenhower served his first term back in the 1950s.

Truman was ranked the highest and happens to be a Democrat. Truman’s tenure saw a budget surplus, reduction in national debt and a record-low unemployment rate of 4%. The second spot also went to a Democrat: John F. Kennedy, who was followed by Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson.

Now Carter’s rank as second last as he served during the difficult economic environment in the 1970s. But since he was the sitting president, I'm not excusing him.

And I am completely aware The Federal Reserve and other politicians in Congress certainly pulled together to help save the economy from financial ruin at the height of the credit crisis.

As the historical record shows, from economic growth and job creation to stock market performance and just about every other indicator of the health of American capitalism, the modern U.S. economy has almost always done better under Democratic presidents. Despite GOP mythology to the contrary, America generally gained more jobs and grew faster when taxes were higher (even much higher) and income inequality lower.